Invited After Transferring to ZEV State Dealer

[jfried]

But there are masses of other customers watching who may remind Ford about the demand side of the equation when market supply increases from Chevy, Tesla, Rivian, Toyota, etc. Or maybe not.

Well summed up!

A very large proportion of customers -- don't have any loyalty today. Heck, even in this thread, on a F150 FORUM, you've got people saying they'll take whichever truck they can get their hands on first.

The reality is, these "prioritizations" are only going to be observed and frustrate a very, very small proportion of the population that actually takes the time to invest in understanding how the system works. Of the people who get frustrated by it, many (like the people on this forum) will find ways to make the system work for them by switching dealers, switching states, etc.; and they'll probably feel a sense of accomplishment in doing so because they "outsmarted" big corporate, and subconsciously associate that sense of accomplishment with their Lightning.

The rest of the population, will get theirs when Ford decides it's their turn, and as long as they don't have tons of trucks sitting on dealer lots with big ADMs, they'll be happy as a clam.

Come the next vehicle, 3-4-5 years down the road, they'll buy what they think is the best vehicle for them, knowing that they'll be a lot more selection in terms of EVs.

Sponsored

 

[Brisket]

This thread certainly got a lot of traction over the last few days. I thought I'd put in my reasons for being irritated at Ford. I was a day 1 reservation, but only if you count it as within the first 24 hours. I generally say day 2 and I think most folks would use that classification.

Being a giant nerd, I modeled the reservation curve using Ford's general announcements and the reservation lists here and on other forums. Based on that, I figured I was probably in the first 30-35k reservations, with a 60% conversion rate I figured I had a small but decent chance for a 2022 model year. Before the Lightning announcement I was driving an older Subaru wagon, but my next vehicle was going to be a truck, and probably was going to get a hybrid or conventional ICE F150. I was (am) very excited about an electric pickup and that will be my next vehicle, but it may no longer be a Ford as other trucks become available and the how the Lightning experience has gone so far. Any of the announced/available trucks will fit most of my needs, but none are a perfect fit so far.

My number one irritation is what I consider the affordability bait-and-switch with pro availability and the cost to move up to the ER battery/motor package. I don't want to get into an argument of how many pro models must be produced for the lowest advertised price to be satisfied, because the fact is, the only number on most of the communication from Ford was $40K for a truck and very few people got the opportunity to buy one. Second, the ER battery was only discussed as a $10K add-on before the pricing was released. It was most often referenced with the Pro version and they were clear that the ER Pro would not be available to the public; but it certainly implied that $10k was the cost. I included some contemporaneous links below.

https://www.autoweek.com/news/future-cars/a36518685/fords-f-150-lightning-pro/

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2022-ford-f-150-lightning-extended-range-battery-configurator/

Sure, sometimes you have to bundle options together, but when all of the marketing emphasizes a truck starting at $40k with a $10k upgrade to the ER version you are deliberately trying to imply a level of affordability and value. If they weren't, they wouldn't advertise it that way. The cheapest consumer available version with the ER is 150% of the implied cost; that is a very large difference and left a bad taste in my mouth.

I'm not quite as annoyed at the reservation system. Demand is high and supply is low, not everyone can be happy. That being said, they could have handled it much better and more transparency would have made almost everyone happier with the process.

If I were to design a "perfect" reservation process I would have changed a few things.

1. Reduce the number of dealer priority spots, I don't mind them offering priority spots to loyal customers, but they shouldn't have offered more spots than allocations, that fact alone rendered the reservation process meaningless for a lot of people.

2. Notify reservation holders that the dealership they choose will have a significant impact on their place in line. They don't have to list all the factors, but they should have let people know that some dealerships would only get a handful of trucks.

3. I've only heard anecdotes of this occurring, but allowing a customer to reserve a truck at a dealership that would get zero allocations should never had happened. If Ford didn't know this was the case at reservation, they should have proactively notified reservation holders and allowed them to defer or switch dealers before Wave 1.

5. Tie allocations to a few dealer responsibilities. First, clear, honest communication with reservation holders. Second, limit ADM. I admit I don't know the dealership regulations in my state, let alone the other 49, but since Ford has implied that excessive ADM will result in reduced allocations in the future, I'm assuming they could have made dealerships agree to certain restrictions for at least the first model year. The glorified auctions that some dealers announced for their priority "Loyalty" slots made a lot of people angry and probably had a net effect of reducing brand loyalty for a couple of million dollars uplift max at any given dealership.

4. Much like Chevy, have two reservation lines, one for a top of the line "collectors edition" and one for the rest of us plebes. This does allow folks to spend to get in early, but Ford is a business and it sets allocation and price ceiling expectations.

I think most of the annoyance and hard feelings from this process spring directly from what people expected, vs what the reality was. I know a lot of people will say things like "Ford didn't promise you anything" or "the marketing said starting at $40k", but the are an international company that spends a ton on advertising an marketing. They knew what impressions they were giving, it was intentional, and the reality was far from what was implied. At best, they didn't communicate across divisions or anticipate how the dealership system would interact with such a high demand vehicle. Caveat Emptor is a good rule of thumb, but companies and their defenders shouldn't be surprised about backlash when people feel misled and definitely shouldn't tell people they were dumb for falling for it after the fact.

 

[workaholic]

This thread certainly got a lot of traction over the last few days. I thought I'd put in my reasons for being irritated at Ford. I was a day 1 reservation, but only if you count it as within the first 24 hours. I generally say day 2 and I think most folks would use that classification.

Being a giant nerd, I modeled the reservation curve using Ford's general announcements and the reservation lists here and on other forums. Based on that, I figured I was probably in the first 30-35k reservations, with a 60% conversion rate I figured I had a small but decent chance for a 2022 model year. Before the Lightning announcement I was driving an older Subaru wagon, but my next vehicle was going to be a truck, and probably was going to get a hybrid or conventional ICE F150. I was (am) very excited about an electric pickup and that will be my next vehicle, but it may no longer be a Ford as other trucks become available and the how the Lightning experience has gone so far. Any of the announced/available trucks will fit most of my needs, but none are a perfect fit so far.

My number one irritation is what I consider the affordability bait-and-switch with pro availability and the cost to move up to the ER battery/motor package. I don't want to get into an argument of how many pro models must be produced for the lowest advertised price to be satisfied, because the fact is, the only number on most of the communication from Ford was $40K for a truck and very few people got the opportunity to buy one. Second, the ER battery was only discussed as a $10K add-on before the pricing was released. It was most often referenced with the Pro version and they were clear that the ER Pro would not be available to the public; but it certainly implied that $10k was the cost. I included some contemporaneous links below.

https://www.autoweek.com/news/future-cars/a36518685/fords-f-150-lightning-pro/

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2022-ford-f-150-lightning-extended-range-battery-configurator/

Sure, sometimes you have to bundle options together, but when all of the marketing emphasizes a truck starting at $40k with a $10k upgrade to the ER version you are deliberately trying to imply a level of affordability and value. If they weren't, they wouldn't advertise it that way. The cheapest consumer available version with the ER is 150% of the implied cost; that is a very large difference and left a bad taste in my mouth.

I'm not quite as annoyed at the reservation system. Demand is high and supply is low, not everyone can be happy. That being said, they could have handled it much better and more transparency would have made almost everyone happier with the process.

If I were to design a "perfect" reservation process I would have changed a few things.

1. Reduce the number of dealer priority spots, I don't mind them offering priority spots to loyal customers, but they shouldn't have offered more spots than allocations, that fact alone rendered the reservation process meaningless for a lot of people.

2. Notify reservation holders that the dealership they choose will have a significant impact on their place in line. They don't have to list all the factors, but they should have let people know that some dealerships would only get a handful of trucks.

3. I've only heard anecdotes of this occurring, but allowing a customer to reserve a truck at a dealership that would get zero allocations should never had happened. If Ford didn't know this was the case at reservation, they should have proactively notified reservation holders and allowed them to defer or switch dealers before Wave 1.

5. Tie allocations to a few dealer responsibilities. First, clear, honest communication with reservation holders. Second, limit ADM. I admit I don't know the dealership regulations in my state, let alone the other 49, but since Ford has implied that excessive ADM will result in reduced allocations in the future, I'm assuming they could have made dealerships agree to certain restrictions for at least the first model year. The glorified auctions that some dealers announced for their priority "Loyalty" slots made a lot of people angry and probably had a net effect of reducing brand loyalty for a couple of million dollars uplift max at any given dealership.

4. Much like Chevy, have two reservation lines, one for a top of the line "collectors edition" and one for the rest of us plebes. This does allow folks to spend to get in early, but Ford is a business and it sets allocation and price ceiling expectations.

I think most of the annoyance and hard feelings from this process spring directly from what people expected, vs what the reality was. I know a lot of people will say things like "Ford didn't promise you anything" or "the marketing said starting at $40k", but the are an international company that spends a ton on advertising an marketing. They knew what impressions they were giving, it was intentional, and the reality was far from what was implied. At best, they didn't communicate across divisions or anticipate how the dealership system would interact with such a high demand vehicle. Caveat Emptor is a good rule of thumb, but companies and their defenders shouldn't be surprised about backlash when people feel misled and definitely shouldn't tell people they were dumb for falling for it after the fact.

your point number 3 is me. there are zero allocations going to the dealership that i picked from fords list of approved dealers in my area. ford knew who was getting what prior to the priority allocations being announced.

 

[RavenYZF-R6]

Ford could only make so many Pros. I do think they should have made more (at least double) than they did, but we can’t expect them to sell 99% Pro and one Platinum during the first year. That would be asinine. When they still restrict the Pro sales through next year I will be 100% on board with calling that a bait and switch.

The real bait and switch to me is forcing a $10,000 package on the XLT just to be able to get the $10,000 additional ER battery. We were expecting the ER battery to be a $7,000 up charge not $20,000!

The reservation system could have been better but they never promised us shit. People just made their own expectations and are disappointing themselves.

 

[WoodduckMN]

I reserved in the first hour of the presentation. When I last talked with my dealer in Minnesota, I’m now #5 on the list. They are only being allotted 3 in the first year. At one point I was told I was one of the three, so I’m not sure what happened, they have over 200 reservations waiting. They told me at one point, no line jumping, not ADM.

 

[EVBill]

The reservation system could have been better but they never promised us shit. People just made their own expectations and are disappointing themselves.

Why even provide time/date stamps on the reservations? That implied to some extent that there was a first come/first serve order. I agree that nothing was provided as to what the actual method would be other than references to time stamps. They would have been better to have indicated it would be a lottery pick from reservations made the first few days or weeks.

 

[Brisket]

Ford could only make so many Pros. I do think they should have made more (at least double) than they did, but we can’t expect them to sell 99% Pro and one Platinum during the first year. That would be asinine. When they still restrict the Pro sales through next year I will be 100% on board with calling that a bait and switch.

The real bait and switch to me is forcing a $10,000 package on the XLT just to be able to get the $10,000 additional ER battery. We were expecting the ER battery to be a $7,000 up charge not $20,000!

The reservation system could have been better but they never promised us shit. People just made their own expectations and are disappointing themselves.

Of course they shouldn't have sold 99% Pro versions, I don't think anyone is arguing that in good faith. If you don't think the current level is bait and switch that's fine; it's also why I didn't want to get into an argument about how many they needed to produce before it didn't "count". There might be a hard and fast legal definition, but much of the thread is about people feeling misled and that will always be subjective. I also was combining the Pro availability with the minimum cost for a consumer to buy the ER version, yes, the option is technically $10, but you have to pay nearly double that with the required package. The marketing of both those facts combined with the reality of pricing an availability bumped it over to bait-and-switch in my opinion.

The second "Ford didn't promise you anything" argument I was trying to avoid is on it's face true, but when you take someone's money for something you called a reservation you set up certain expectations. They gave folks a number and stored it by reservation timestamp. Expecting that the allocations would have some relationship to reservation order is a perfectly valid thing to expect. Again, I'm not talking about legal liability; their fine print had enough caveats that they could have probably gone in random order with no legal implications. I think anyone that reserved within the first few minutes but won't get a truck because their dealer prioritized more people than they had allocations or didn't receive any allocations certainly have a right to be annoyed.

Businesses have a right and duty to make money, but I'm not so cynical that I'm just going to shrug and say "you got me this time" when a company says or implies one thing with their actions or marketing, but then delivers another thing entirely. There's a point where advertising puffery crosses the line and become misleading and I believe Ford crossed it with Pro availability and ER pricing and skirted it with specific situations with the reservation system.

One of the biggest ways to lose or offend a customer is to to make them feel a transaction wasn't fair. Transparency is the only way to avoid that feeling in a situation where the supply so far outstrips demand and I don't think Ford met that bar. "They didn't promise us shit" doesn't address any of the issues that people had with the system; it's saying that you can't be mad at a company for implying something as long as the fine print is good enough.

*Edit* This probably came off a little more argumentative than I meant it to. I think we're on the same page for most things, just clarifying where we didn't.

 

[TaxmanHog]

If I could walk in the shoes of Jim Farley for a week, here is what I would've laid out!

Briefly setting aside the concerns of stock holders and industry financial analysts, yes Ford has a duty to it's stakeholders, this includes more than those holder shares, they could miss a few quarters or more of optimum profitability while they kick off this and other new and revolutionized product lines.

This vehicle is a revolutionary change for the F series, the company is in for the long haul, there are potentially millions of life long customers to introduce this model to, never mind drawing the interest of other brand loyalist.

In time the production limitations will ease and they will be in position to fulfill a broader spectrum of consumer choices.

There should have been no limitations of trim levels, adding a PRO-ER should have been a no brainer, the customer is always right, give them what they want, I personally plan to go with a Lariat-ER and there are many like me who will generate profits for the shareholders.

Prioritizations, no more than 20% of allocations. (dealer has 1 Priority for 5 allocated which are determined for INTRO year Para mutual of national sales volume) disregard the lure of ZEV adjustments during introduction year, give a taste to all Ford followers nationwide, stimulate the market demand, but in year 2+ to adjust allocations to help the ZEV states meet their 2030, 2040 & 2050 goals.

ADM's: none to 2% of MSRP, encourage competition at the risk of greed whiplash.

Allow the first 15,000 buyers the opportunity to pick any trim with the understanding that resources are limited, there would likely be unbuildable units, those folks in time stamp order, last to the list of buyers per trim line would see their orders delayed until the subsequent model year.

 

[jfried]

Of course they shouldn't have sold 99% Pro versions, I don't think anyone is arguing that in good faith. If you don't think the current level is bait and switch that's fine; it's also why I didn't want to get into an argument about how many they needed to produce before it didn't "count". There might be a hard and fast legal definition, but much of the thread is about people feeling misled and that will always be subjective. I also was combining the Pro availability with the minimum cost for a consumer to buy the ER version, yes, the option is technically $10, but you have to pay nearly double that with the required package. The marketing of both those facts combined with the reality of pricing an availability bumped it over to bait-and-switch in my opinion.

The second "Ford didn't promise you anything" argument I was trying to avoid is on it's face true, but when you take someone's money for something you called a reservation you set up certain expectations. They gave folks a number and stored it by reservation timestamp. Expecting that the allocations would have some relationship to reservation order is a perfectly valid thing to expect. Again, I'm not talking about legal liability; their fine print had enough caveats that they could have probably gone in random order with no legal implications. I think anyone that reserved within the first few minutes but won't get a truck because their dealer prioritized more people than they had allocations or didn't receive any allocations certainly have a right to be annoyed.

Businesses have a right and duty to make money, but I'm not so cynical that I'm just going to shrug and say "you got me this time" when a company says or implies one thing with their actions or marketing, but then delivers another thing entirely. There's a point where advertising puffery crosses the line and become misleading and I believe Ford crossed it with Pro availability and ER pricing and skirted it with specific situations with the reservation system.

One of the biggest ways to lose or offend a customer is to to make them feel a transaction wasn't fair. Transparency is the only way to avoid that feeling in a situation where the supply so far outstrips demand and I don't think Ford met that bar. "They didn't promise us shit" doesn't address any of the issues that people had with the system; it's saying that you can't be mad at a company for implying something as long as the fine print is good enough.

*Edit* This probably came off a little more argumentative than I meant it to. I think we're on the same page for most things, just clarifying where we didn't.

With respect to the pro, to me it has very "problematic" positioning to begin with. Obviously, the big appeal with it is price, being that it costs essentially the exact same as a no-option XL, with 4wd and a quad cab.... but I do wonder, how many XL, 4wd, Quad cabs does ford actually sell in a year??

I'd imagine that most people who buy XL trucks are either fleet customers, or end users using them exclusively as work / contractor vehicles. Either would likely be outfitting them with custom box solutions on the back. I'd think a single cab, or MAYBE a supercab are purchased far more often than a quad cab.

Obviously, they didn't want to engineer / crash test a single-cab configuration upon launch, so maybe they're hoping that with the frunk, these customers are ok with a quad cab/short bed combo. Personally, what I think they should have done with the pro is make the rear seat optional at ~$900-- making it clearer what this truck is for, and opening up a whole new host of possibilities for installers to use the rear seat area for additional storage / racking / etc.

To me, the purpose of the Pro is to showcase it as a future fleet replacement - both big and small. Your local hydro or telco that has ~100 trucks on the road and is handled by Ford Fleet, but also that small business owner, who has 7 or 8 trucks on the road, and likely wouldn't classify as a "fleet buyer" because he refreshes 2 every year kind of thing.

The challenge is -- Ford's built a product to hit a price point in a certain market. Realistically, this site is filled with enthusiasts. If Ford had their way, no enthusiast would be in one of these vehicles. But, because it's the cheapest one, you've got end users who look at it as "the affordable option". Ford has a restriction for Xplan that must be registered in personal name. It would have almost made sense to do the opposite -- require Pro purchasers to register to their business -- and state that right from the get-go.



As for reservations, the expectation that a reservation (and it's timing) should have some tie to allocations/order placing is perfectly valid... and they certainly do / will once prioritization are satisfied, subject to regional priorities. What has people upset is that it's not a hard, direct tie, which I don't believe is a realistic expectation. Ford is a very large company, with many priorities -- they're not starting from scratch. Even Tesla doesn't always follow it's reservation order.

 

[Akovia]

Tried that locally here. Transferring from dealer who had my first day reservation as 35 out of 25 he had allocated. The other dealer said they'd get back to me but nothing yet.

The Ford reservation system has to be considered a failure in the sense it really made no difference when you reserved, only which dealer you reserved with.

Ford should have prioritized by reservation date and if a customer picked a dealer, that dealer got that allocation for that customer.

While not completely disconnected, that a first day reservation means you are two years out and well after others who reserved months later, does render it meaningless.

Disappointing.

Not only was my dealer unresponsive (Dicks MacKenzie in Hillsboro) the dealership sold last week to Ron Tonkin Ford, which immediately refunded my $100 reservation deposit. My call to try and unwrap this SNAFU got me “don’t worry” platitudes and not a single shred of useful information. As stated before, as long as it meets my range and payload requirements, I don’t care which badge the truck has. Whomever puts one in my driveway first gets my money. FoMoCo has, so far, botched rollouts for Bronco, Mach-e, and now Lightning. It’s worse than when Edsel was running the shop, and that was a disaster!

 

[UncleLou]

I’m in same boat. Have reservations for both lightning and r1t.

Before you go lauding Rivian’s “fairness” you should check out the forums.

Almost the same amount and kind of griping going on over there except instead of Ford prioritizing existing customers and friends it’s Rivian prioritizing employees, affiliates and the C suite. They claim to have delivered close to 1200 trucks to customers but as near as anyone can tell a very small number went to “real” customers and most went to employees and affiliates.

Here’s another super fair move Rivian made. When a lot of us ordered (early) they said orders would be delivered in order of reservation (launch edition obviously prioritized). 3 years later and they decided, seemingly on the spur of the moment that all max pack holders (400 mile version) would be pushed back to 2023 regardless of order number. That means that someone who made a September 2021 order might get a truck before someone who ordered in 2018! Given Rivian’s glacial ramp, I doubt we’ll see those trucks before 2024.

For me the decision (at least the way I’m thinking about it right now) was pretty simple. For a risky first year product do I want to deal with a dealership 5 miles from me for repairs or a CA company that doesn’t even have a service center within 200 miles of me and has had hundreds of open postings for service technician jobs for months now.

That said, I’m still holding onto my reservation with Rivian (at least until I get any signs they’re in trouble, eg unable to ramp in Feb-Mar). If the lightning is a POS I’m still betting there’ll be a huge amount of demand in 2024 and I can just sell or trade it on the r1t.

Then don't have reservations. It is that simple. It's either a reservation or not.

Just made $1k reservation on Rivian which will be $10k cheaper and which...shocker...delivers in reservation order. Be interesting to see how Ford does vs. Rivian.

 

[jfried]

If I could walk in the shoes of Jim Farley for a week, here is what I would've laid out!

....

Prioritizations, no more than 20% of allocations. (dealer has 1 Priority for 5 allocated which are determined for INTRO year Para mutual of national sales volume) disregard the lure of ZEV adjustments during introduction year, give a taste to all Ford followers nationwide, stimulate the market demand, but in year 2+ to adjust allocations to help the ZEV states meet their 2030, 2040 & 2050 goals.

ADM's: none to 2% of MSRP, encourage competition at the risk of greed whiplash.

Allow the first 15,000 buyers the opportunity to pick any trim with the understanding that resources are limited, there would likely be unbuildable units, those folks in time stamp order, last to the list of buyers per trim line would see their orders delayed until the subsequent model year.

To be fair, I think you've put a lot of "this is what I'd like Farley to do to suit me" into this comment.

If we throw out immediate returns / profit for a moment, to me, the "mantra" for the first year should have been: "Use this to set ourselves up for success when the competition eventually arrives".

While I agree with you that dealers shouldn't have been able to prioritize their entire first year's allocation and then some, I don't think there's any overarching reason to limit it to 20%. To me, 50% is a happy medium, and something that the average loyal ford buyer can understand.

On ZEV states, I think there's probably a lot of market research that says seeing cars helps sell more cars. They need to get adoption in those ZEV states, so while of course you want everyone to get a taste, you do need to disproportionately allocate them to the ZEV states so as to increase adoption 1-2 years from now.

As for product mix (notably the ER on the pro), I think with pro customers, these Pros are really meant to be "trial" units for fleet customers... big fleet (~50+ vehicles?)... bring in 2-3 to see how they perform alongside your gas counterparts. Small fleet (5-10 trucks?), bring in one to "live with" for a year. Nobody is converting their entire fleet of pickups to EV this year. Part of this "trial" exercise needs to be Ford showing it's fleet customers that they don't need ER and can buy quad-cab short box trucks at $40k (versus their current fleet of XLs at ~$30-$35k). If the ER is available in the Pro, they may sell more of them today, but they won't really lay the groundwork for companies understanding that a SR is more than fine for them.

If it turns out that the companies who buy the pro are running into range issues, well then they've got a really easy solution in the Pro-ER to come the following year.

On the same lines, I think Ford is pretty close to bang on how they've "spread" Pro vs XLT vs Lariat vs Platinum. Trucks on the road are going to be moving billboards for the company. The pro is missing the iconic lightbars, and is likely going to be bastardized with logos, wraps, roof racks, toolboxes, etc. They're also going to get beat up, as the people driving them are not the people who own them. When people look in the window at a parking lot you want them to be a little jealous... but at the same time, you don't neccessarily want to do all Platinums; as it's not meant to be exclusively a $90k truck.

As well, I think Ford wants to avoid some of the ridiculously long lead times from order to vehicle, so they'd rather not take the order than take one for a trim line that they're not going to build for MY22.

In terms of ADM / pricing, this is admittedly something that is a legal issue more than anything. Ford cannot enforce price-fixing. They really can't stop ADMs, just like they really can't stop Granger from undercutting everybody at invoice less a %.

 

[EaglesPDX]

I think most of the annoyance and hard feelings from this process spring directly from what people expected, vs what the reality was.

The reservation was a reality and reservations are just that, first to reserve, first to get. Ford should have announced that it was not a reservation at all and that making a reservation had no relationship to when you got a car.

 

[EaglesPDX]

Before you go lauding Rivian’s “fairness” you should check out the forums.

Going more by their next day responses to my emails. They are big on communication.

"As far as a rough estimate for now, I can tell you that any recently place pre orders can expect delivery after 2022".

I'm in '24 with local Ford dealer so I'd expect to see the Rivian before the F150.

Rivian also noted that they are setting up an "Account Page" to show customers where they stand with delivery.

 

[shutterbug]

As for product mix (notably the ER on the pro), I think with pro customers, these Pros are really meant to be "trial" units for fleet customers... big fleet (~50+ vehicles?)... bring in 2-3 to see how they perform alongside your gas counterparts. Small fleet (5-10 trucks?), bring in one to "live with" for a year. Nobody is converting their entire fleet of pickups to EV this year. Part of this "trial" exercise needs to be Ford showing it's fleet customers that they don't need ER and can buy quad-cab short box trucks at $40k (versus their current fleet of XLs at ~$30-$35k). If the ER is available in the Pro, they may sell more of them today, but they won't really lay the groundwork for companies understanding that a SR is more than fine for them.

Fleet buyers are able to order Pros with ER.

Sponsored